The Rhythms of Black Speech

Flammifer

Flammifer

Well-Known Member
Here are some additional thoughts on the rhythms of Black Speech.

First, an observation or assumption. We do not come to this first example of Black Speech without any prior knowledge. We have encountered the Ring inscription before. In Frodo’s parlor. Where the narrator includes a picture of the text on the Ring in Elvish letters, and where JRRT gives us an English translation of the inscription (presumably from Gandalf’s Westron). Gandalf does not recite the Black Speech version in Bag End, but when he does, in Rivendell, we already know a lot about the words.

  • We know that the inscription on the Ring is only part of a longer verse.
  • We know (or assume) that it is an ‘incantation’, a ‘spell’, the insertion of the Will of Sauron into the Ring.
  • We have contradictory information about whether it is supposed to be two lines or four lines. Gandalf says, “It is only two lines of a verse long known in Elven-lore”, but the image, of the Elvish script clearly shows four parts. I think it is two lines, each line in two parts, as depicted. The letters run “along the ring, outside and inside". I guess one line runs around the outside of the Ring in two parts, and the second line runs around the inside of the Ring in two parts, as depicted. JRRT also puts the Ring inscription into two lines when translating Gandalf's recitation of the whole incantation.

Contrary to the breakdown of syllables arrived at in the class, I suggest that ‘ba’, ‘ka’, and ‘pa’ are not syllables. ‘atuluk’ and ‘atul’ are clearly suffixes. They are suffixes denoting the subject of a verb. The verbs are ‘durb’ (to rule), ‘gimb’ (to find), ‘thrak’ (to bring), ‘krimp’ (to bind). Does anyone know of a language where the root word and the suffix are broken up to make a syllable bridging both of them? I think this is unlikely. So, I think the syllabication of the Black Speech should be ‘durb a tul uk’, ‘gimb a tul’, ‘thrak a tul uk’, ‘krimp a tul’.

Now, the short syllable ‘a’ could be stressed, but I think it unlikely. I think the more likely stress would be:

Ash nazg durb a tul uk, ash nazg gimb a tul,

Ash nazg thrak a tul uk agh burz um – ish i krimp a tul.

That’s a lot of stressed syllables, and a lot of consecutive stresses. More perhaps than normal in speech patterns, but this is an incantation, where more stress might be expected..

I also think that ‘luk’ is not a syllable. ‘uk’ is the syllable. ‘atul’ is a complete suffix as in gimbatul and krimpatul. ‘uk’ is an additional suffix. I doubt that the suffixes would have a syllable that bridges both of them, rather than break syllables at their natural join?

Now, the suffix ‘atul’ is translated into English as ‘them’. The suffix ‘uk’ is translated into English as ‘all’. So, ‘atul’ means ‘them’ and ‘atuluk’ means ‘them all’. Why? What is the difference between ‘them’ and ‘them all’? Who ‘them’ are is clear from the part of the incantation that is not inscribed on the Ring, but is recited in Bag End, in translation, by Gandalf. ‘They’ are the Three, the Seven, and the Nine rings. What is added by adding ‘all’ to ‘them’ in two of the sections? The meaning of ‘them’ and ‘them all’ is the same in English? I suggest that in the incantation, ‘them’ does not mean to include just the Three, Seven, and Nine, but also their bearers; Elven-kings, Dwarf-lords, and Mortal Men. Probably, in the Black Speech, ‘atul’ is not sufficient to make this clear and unambiguous. ‘uk’ needs to be added a couple of times to make sure that the bearers are included.



Finally, the jarring rhythm in the last section? I suggest that this is deliberate by JRRT. He put it in to subtly suggest a flaw in the spell. Either Sauron is not a good enough poet and magician to cast the spell aright, or the Black Speech (certainly a ‘marred’ language) does not allow both the precision of phrase and the precision of rhythm needed to make the spell flawless?

We know that Sauron’s spell was flawed. It did not work as intended.

  • The Elves heard his spell. Was this due to the jar in the rhythm?
  • The Elves hid the Three, and the One could not ‘find them’ (let alone rule them, bring them nor bind them) despite the spell.
  • The One could not find the Seven (let alone rule them, bring them, nor bind them). Sauron only recovered three of the Seven, and at least one of those after he had lost the One, so without the benefit of the spell.
Sauron’s spell was flawed. It did not work as intended. Indeed, it only really seemed to work on the Nine and their bearers. (Why did it work on the Nine?)

Hypothesis: JRRT made the rhythm of Sauron’s incantation flawed to indicate that Sauron’s spell was flawed. “Oft evil will shall evil mar.” Sauron just couldn’t help wanting to make the incantation in the Black Speech that he had devised. Oh proud Dark Lord! Had you but conjured in Quenya, would it all have worked?
 
Last edited:
I'd think the Rings coming back without their bearers would be akin to a fisherman's hook coming back without a fish.
I wonder if the distinction between 'them' and 'them all' relates to the simultaneity of the actions.

The ruling is intended to occur simultaneously once the other actions are complete, the finding may occur simultaneously or not, the bringing probably works best if it occurred (or at least started) simultaneously, but the binding might occur disparately as they aren't likely to be equidistant from the One at the time of the 'bringing'. Perhaps that's a stretch, but I don't think it can be ruled out immediately.
 
Having read the post on Gandalf's curious assertion about the Great Rings, I've had a further thought.

As has been established, even with the One, Sauron can't find the Three Rings, the Seven Rings seem hard to find, and maybe even the Nine Rings weren't found, just their bearers.

Maybe it is:
One Ring to rule them all (Ring bearers and Rings), One Ring to find them (Ring Bearers),
One Ring to bring them all (Ring bearers and Rings), and in the Darkness bind them (Ring Bearers)

Or maybe it's both ideas together; Tolkien often brought multiple ideas together elegantly.
 
Hi Anthony,

I am sure that Sauron intended his spell to envelope both the Rings and their bearers.

Two main points here:

  1. In the English translation, the Rings are quite well specified, the bearers, however, less so. 'Elven-kings, Dwarf-lords, Mortal Men' are broad categories that do not specifically define 'Ring-bearing Elven-kings, Dwarf-lords and Mortal Men.
  2. In the English translation, the suffix 'atul' is translated as 'them', and the double suffix 'atuluk' is translated as 'them all'. However, in English, there is no real difference in meaning between 'them' and 'them all'. If there is any difference at all in English between the two phrases, it is perhaps only that 'them all' has a slightly greater emphasis.

So, the English translation contains two possible ambiguities: What exactly is meant by the category; 'them'? What is the difference between 'them' and 'them all'.

My speculation is that these two ambiguities are mostly problems of translation. Spells should be carefully constructed and precise. (Though we also speculate that there was a flaw in Sauron's spell. But, I hypothesize that the flaw was in the rhythm, rather than the phrasing.)

So, I think that in the original Black Speech the phrases 'Elven-kings, Dwarf-lords, Mortal Men' had some more precise definition (perhaps conveyed by a prefix or suffix or some other grammatical construct) which made it clear that it meant 'Ring-bearing Elven-kings, Dwarf-lords, Mortal Men'. Perhaps when the English translation says, 'Three Rings for Elven-kings under the sky", the Dark Speech word that was translated as 'for' had a slightly different and more precise meaning. Something like: "Three Rings held by Elven-kings", which would make the category 'Elven-kings' more clearly defined as not 'all Elven-kings', but 'Elven-kings with a Ring in their keeping'?

I also suspect that the difference in definition between 'atul' and 'atuluk' in the Black Speech was greater than the difference between 'them' and 'them all' in English. Perhaps 'atul' had the same definition as 'them', but 'atuluk' was more precise than 'them all' meaning something more like 'every object previously mentioned in this incantation'.

There is a double translation here. Black Speech into Westron. Westron into English. There are also two translators, Gandalf and JRRT. The difficulty of this double double translation is compounded by the desire to keep the English translation in poetic verse. Not surprising that a few minor ambiguities exist in the English translation which probably were clearer in the original.
 
Last edited:
For a start, we have no evidence that the larger 'verse long known in Elven-lore' was all in the Black Speech. In fact, our previous analysis back when we encountered it in The Shadow of the Past showed that these two lines were significantly metrically different, and therefore likely to have originated in a different language, been written by a different author, or both.
The elements of the poem surrounding these two lines are simply descriptive of the distribution of the Rings and where the Dark Lord is. In fact it would seem somewhat foolish for Sauron to build into his spell the precise number of Rings to control. If that were the case it would leave the door open for the crafting of new Rings that might escape his control. By being specifically vague, using 'them all', then all future Rings crafted with this knowledge would also fall under his power. This was likely to be Saruman's fate if Sauron won.

That said, I don't deny the merit of the multiple translations introducing ambiguity theory.

However, if you think about standing in a line waiting to get into a venue there is a significant difference between 'them' and 'them all'. In that case 'them' can be the group at the head of the line, while 'them all' could be the whole line; or 'them' could be just a few members of the group at the head of the line, while 'them all' could be the whole group. Either way, 'them' is more selective than 'them all'.

I think any demands for precision in the wording of spells might be imported from other traditions, as I don't think we get enough examples in Middle-Earth (or Arda) of the crafting of spells to confirm or deny this statement.
 
Good points Anthony,

I surmise that given JRRTs love of language and words, it is probable that precision in wording of spells was very important in Middle Earth. True, that may also be the case in other traditions, and may have been imported, but it is just the sort of thing that JRRT would likely have imported.

On the question of 'them' vs. 'them all', the only difference is if 'them' is qualified (either by gesture, inference, or word). If there is no qualifier, 'let them in' must mean the whole line, and have the same meaning as 'let them all in'. The only difference would be slightly more emphasis if saying, 'let them all in', as though it was a bigger deal than if just, 'let them in' had been said. 'Let them in', is also slightly more ambiguous than 'let them all in', as the door ward might ask, 'all of them?' for clarification. However, the meaning of the two terms is the same.

In the case of the two line incantation in the Black Speech, what constitutes 'them' is totally undefined. We must go to the longer version of the spell, as preserved in Elvish lore, to get any definition of 'them', and even that definition is ambiguous as far as the bearers are concerned.

So, for the two lines to be effective as a spell (if language and song are critical to spells in Middle Earth, as they seem to be) then there must be another part of the spell that defines 'them'. The missing part is likely to be the longer poem in Elvish lore, not all of which was inscribed on the Ring, only the two lines specifically describing the powers of the Ring, and most relevant to the Ring itself.

Now, of course, you could be correct that the whole spell might not have been in the Black Speech. Only the critical activating lines? However, I think it likely that the whole longer verse is what "The smiths of Eregion heard and knew they were betrayed". The smiths might have known they were betrayed had they heard only the two lines inscribed on the Ring, but how and why would the longer version have entered into Elvish lore, or 'remained long known in Elvish lore' unless it was what the Elves heard when they overheard Sauron betraying them?

It is also interesting that if all the smiths heard was the two lines in Black Speech, how did they know what they meant? We are told that the Black Speech was devised by Sauron in the Dark Years, and despite his ambition to make it the language of all who served him, he failed in that purpose. So, how did some among the Elves understand the Black Speech at the time Sauron spoke the Ring inscription. Sauron had just completed Barad-dur. He had probably just devised the Black Speech. After all, the Dark Years had not really started. Sauron was still disguised a 'gift giver' and downplaying his role as Dark Lord and Evil Emperor. If the rest of the incantation was not in the Black Speech, the Elves might have had an easier time guessing or translating Sauron's intent? (Of course, it is possible that the Elves detected Sauron's betrayal more through spiritual means than literal eavesdropping, but Gandalf does say 'the smiths of Eregion heard and knew they were betrayed'.) (Though Gandalf was not in Middle-earth at the time, nor for 2,800 more years, so his account of the Elvish smiths' detection of Sauron's betrayal must be based on accounts from Elrond or Galadriel or other lore.)

So, several questions, on which we can only speculate:

  • Did Sauron recite the whole spell, or only the two lines?
  • Did the Elvish smiths hear the whole poem or only the two lines?
  • Was the whole poem in Black Speech, or only the two lines?
  • How did the Elvish smiths understand Black Speech?
 
My theory: Sauron's incantation is in the same rhythm as the first sentence of the barrow-wight's incantation to Morgoth, who we can deduce was speaking (Proto-) Black Speech, telepathically conveying the meaning while preserving the rhythm.

Apart from making it sound like an incantation, we can thereby also explain the purpose of the so-called "added" syllable: in reality, there is in fact a left out syllable, an unwritten menacing silence, just before the last, climactic sentence is uttered.

To make this work (i) we drop the assumption that the circumflex implies a stress, it's just a short "oo" sound, and (ii) we assume that "agh" or "and" is the swallowed syllable, as we would swallow an "and" in an English sentence. Then we get the following solution, where the bold letters are both a stress in the metre and a count in the rhythm. So incant the below, such that "Ash[...]Nazg[...]" takes as long to say as "durbatulûk"

Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazg gimbatul,
ash nazg thrakatulûk... agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.

Musically it should sound like the below, to be spoken slowly, in a demonic voice. Bang your hand on the table to keep count to the slow, ultra-regular drumbeat. Note that one drumbeat falls in the silence just before "agh", which is an unstressed syllable, just after the 'stressed' silent drumbeat.

AASH[...] NAAZG[...] DURbaTUlûk, AASH[...] NAAZG[...] GIMbaTUL[...]
AASH[...] NAAZG[...] THRAkaTUlûk [...] agh BURzum-ISHi KRIMpaTUL!!!

The reason Sauron puts a silence on the stressed syllable before "agh" is because of a sense of drama: he wants to raise the tension before uttering his devastating final sentence, spoken in a crescendo, with "KRIM" being the climax. Both "Ash" and "Nazg" are given time to breathe, for obvious reasons: he wants to emphasise both words in One[...] Ring[...].

Compare:

"Cold [be] heart [and] hand and bone and Cold be sleep [...] under stone[...]".
"Ash [...] nazg [...] dur ba tu lûk, ash [...] nazg [...] gimbatul"

If you remember the silences, it's bang-on regular. Thud, Thud, Thud, Thud. Thud, Thud, Thud, Thud. That's the rhythm of black magical incantations.

(Hmmm, I can't upload an mp3 here to demonstrate. Perhaps just as well, as I lack Christopher Lee's voice!)
 
Hi Akshay,

I find your speculations intriguing. And I like your thought that there could be a connection between the Barrow wight incantation and Sauron's. But let me make a few different suggestions:

1: I doubt that ba, ka and pa are syllables, as they cut across the divide between the verbs; durb, gimb, thrak, and krimp, and the suffix atul. I think it unlikely that a syllable would bridge between verb and suffix, rather than separate at the natural divide. Likewise, I doubt that lûk is a syllable, as it cuts across the divide between the suffix; atul, and the other suffix; ûk.

2. I find it hard to avoid stressing the syllable 'ûk' in 'durb a tul ûk' and 'thrak a tul ûk', due to the circumflex.

So, though I like the thought that there might be a connection between the two incantations, I find difficulties in your suggested rhythm.
 
Last edited:
OK, Flammifer, let's try your way but without stressing "agh", which is just a connecting "and", right? The result is then a rhythmically flawless sequence of 4X4 drumbeats, so I don't think Sauron messed up his rhythm here. Just say [atul] as quick sixteenth notes, [at], [um] and [ahg] as eighth notes, and Ash, Nazg, ûk and ûl as slow quarter notes. The chant is then in a slow common 4-4 time signature, strictly in beat, we can clap along:

Ash[...] Nazg[...] Durb[atul]Ûk[...]
Ash[...] Nazg[...] Gimb[at]Ûl[...]
Ash[...] Nazg[...] Thrak[atul]Ûk[agh]
Burz[um]-Ish Krimp[at]Ûl[...]

Dhum. Dhum. DhumdaraDhum.
Dhum. Dhum. DhumbaDhum.
Dhum. Dhum. DhumdaraDhumba
DhumbaDhumba DhumbaDhum!

...which I kinda like, it works, definitely sounds villainous, but which I submit still uses the same four beats per measure as first lines of the Barrow-Wight poem:

Dhum-ba-Dhum-ba-Dhum-ba-Dhum-ba.
DhumbaDhum. DhumbaDhum.
 
Flammifer said:
Contrary to the breakdown of syllables arrived at in the class, I suggest that ‘ba’, ‘ka’, and ‘pa’ are not syllables. ‘atuluk’ and ‘atul’ are clearly suffixes. They are suffixes denoting the subject of a verb. The verbs are ‘durb’ (to rule), ‘gimb’ (to find), ‘thrak’ (to bring), ‘krimp’ (to bind). Does anyone know of a language where the root word and the suffix are broken up to make a syllable bridging both of them? I think this is unlikely. So, I think the syllabication of the Black Speech should be ‘durb a tul uk’, ‘gimb a tul’, ‘thrak a tul uk’, ‘krimp a tul’.

I also think that ‘luk’ is not a syllable. ‘uk’ is the syllable. ‘atul’ is a complete suffix as in gimbatul and krimpatul. ‘uk’ is an additional suffix. I doubt that the suffixes would have a syllable that bridges both of them, rather than break syllables at their natural join?

Now, the suffix ‘atul’ is translated into English as ‘them’. The suffix ‘uk’ is translated into English as ‘all’. So, ‘atul’ means ‘them’ and ‘atuluk’ means ‘them all’.
Click to expand...

I think it equally likely that the "at" or "a" element could be part of the infinitive of the verb and therefore not part of the "them" or "them all" suffix. It's also possible that the accent mark on the "luk/uk" ALL piece of the suffix is specifically there to clue us in that the stress pattern is different than the version of the word without the ALL inclusive element. For example "to rule them" might be durbatul but might change to durbatulûk because of the accent mark on the additional suffix. This kind of syllable stress shift with a suffix can be seen in English words such as photograph and photographer.

If we allow our stress pattern to follow the rhythm of the line with a driving beat (a la forge hammer), the most natural stress pattern I feel is as follows (I've inserted a ~ where a rest beat falls if that beat is not filled by an unstressed syllable.):

Ash ~ nazg durbatulûk, ~ ash ~ nazg ~ gimbatul, ~
ash ~ nazg thrakatulûk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.
 
Last edited:
Sorry to keep yapping, but one final point:

Remember how in the Barrow Wight poem words like "black wind" and "dark lord" stuck out like sore thumbs? The words which need to stick out here are "Ash Nazg", he's screaming that out, the power is behind those words.

And I think we all agree on "agh burzum-ishi krimpatul", so that fixes gimbatul. That leaves durbatulûk and thrakatulûk.

By Flammifer's method of emphasising the first and last syllables of the final words you get the most regular result for everything else. Musigal needs to wait before gimbatul, and my original suggestions requires waiting before agh. Hence, in 4/4 meter, regular dhums:

ASH[...] NAZG[...] Durb[atul]Ûk[...]
ASH[...] NAZG[...] Gimb[at]Ûl[...]
ASH[...] NAZG[...] Thrak[atul]Ûk [agh] Burz[um]-Ishi Krimp[at]Ûl![...]

DHUM. DHUM. DhumdaraDhum.
DHUM. DHUM. DhumbaDhum.
DHUM. DHUM. DhumdaraDhumbaDhumbaDhumbaDhumbaDhum!
 
Good work on the rhythm, Akshay and musigal,

Now, at the risk of messing up those regular drum-beats, what do you think about the stress on 'Agh'?

'Agh' is translated as 'and'. Now, normally a linking word like 'and' might well be un-stressed. But, this is an incantation. The "Agh burzum-ishi krimpatul' is the last, and completing phrase in the inscription (though in the full poem, it is succeeded by "In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie"). I wonder if a triumphant, concluding, and stressed 'and' might not be used?

One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all, AND in the darkness bind them!

ASH NAZG Durb a tul ûk! ASH NAZG Gimb a tul!
ASH NAZG Thrak a tul ûk! AGH Bur zum-Ish i Krimp a tul!

I'm not sure, but I like the idea of a dramatic 'AND' flourish to conclude the spell. It also further highlights the irregularity of the last of the four parts, which could be just the dramatic ending of the spell, but, which I like to speculate indicates the flaw in the spell which means that the One Ring cannot find the Three once they are hidden, and that the One does not really work on the Seven as intended.

What do you guys think?

By the way, how well do you think Gandalf can speak Black Speech? Where would he have learned it? Gandalf was not in Middle Earth during the Dark Years in the Second Age, when the Black Speech was first used in Mordor. When Sauron declared himself again in the Third Age, only the Nazgul and a few others of Sauron's servants used it. Where would Gandalf have heard it? Would he have gotten the accent right?
 
The goblin song ("or croak") in The Hobbit is in Westron, but I think it's an interesting comparison anyway.

Clap! Snap! the black crack!
Grip, grab! Pinch, nab!
And down down to Goblin-town
You go, my lad!

Here the multitude of exclamation marks would help a lot with the stresses, except there are so few unstressed syllables that they're essentially useless <g>. It's all very unsophisticated (as you'd expect of goblins) and "truly terrifying" to Bilbo.

But I've just noticed something that never struck me before. The narrator goes on with:

"The general meaning of the song was only too plain; for now the goblins took out whips and whipped them with a swish, smack!, and set them running as fast as they could..."

Does that mean the song was not in Westron, after all? Or is it just the croaking way the goblins speak making it difficult to understand the words?
 
Hi Jim,

I'm not sure what you mean by 'does that mean that the song was not in Westron after all'?

In JRRT's translation, the black crack opens and closes with a 'clap! snap!'. The Goblins grab the dwarves and hobbit and thrust them down the crack with a 'grip! grab! and 'pinch, nab!'

Then, to hustle them down to Goblin-town, the Goblins get out their whips which go 'swish, smack!' 'Swish, smack! is not necessarily a translation from the Westron (though it could be a translation of Bilbo's narration). It might be narration by JRRT. In any case, whether translation or narration, JRRT seems to have chosen the English words to rhyme with 'black crack!' in the Goblin song, which presumably is a translation from Westron.

I don't see anything here to indicate that the Goblin song was not in Westron. If it were not in Westron, presumably Bilbo would not have understood it, JRRT could not have translated it, and it would not be in the book. If you think that the phrase, 'the general meaning of the song was only too plain,' might indicate that the meaning was blurred due to language, I think that the whips just re-inforce the meaning that the dwarves have been captured and are being driven down to Goblin-town. What am I missing?
 
Flammifer said:
If you think that the phrase, 'the general meaning of the song was only too plain,' might indicate that the meaning was blurred due to language,
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm a bit puzzled by that phrase, and thought at that moment that it might mean that Bilbo and the Dwarves could not understand the words (though of course the narrator could translate them!). I still find that somewhat plausible, but it is much more likely that the phrase is just an extra hint, for young readers, of the meaning of the poem.

The Hobbit, as we have said many times, is not the fully-realized integrated world of tLotR, and such niceties as what languages are spoken are pretty much just left out or taken for granted throughout. I don't remember, for example, any explanation of why the wolves and the eagles could talk and be understood.

I am actually still trying to clarify to myself what my point really is in this thread, so don't you worry about missing anything!
 
Just listened to this episode in my blazing quest to catch up, and thought I would bring a thought.

In my reading, the circumflex is not (directly) telling us about the stress. It is denoting a short u sound, (as in luck) where as the others are long u (as in tool)

The suffixes seem to be additive, similar to Turkish, and so I agree with Flamifer that it is ûk rather than lûk... but take that a step further... could it be at-ul-ûk? Suffixes have a vowel followed by a consonant? It could make sense.
at (denote person/object) = him/her/it
ul (denote plural) = them
ûk (denote all) = them all

With these thoughts, and considering sans-circumflex u as long, circumflex u as short, you can easily say the verse with stress landing on the first and third syllables of the longer verb constructions.

ASH NAZG Durb at ul ûk! ASH NAZG Gimb at ul!
ASH NAZG Thrak at ul ûk! AGH Bur zum-Ishi Krimp at ul!

I said it about a hundred times to myself yesterday, and could not get the last line out if I stressed the final syllable of atulûk.
I'm still not sure of the stress on Burzum-ishi. Could be Burzum -ishi, could be Burzum-ishi. Works either way.

Final thought... Are we sure that agh is the conjunction "and"? Could it be the preposition in, with ishi being the conjunction "and"?
If so, the stress on agh, and no stress on ishi makes a lot more sense. Just saying that a non-English speaker might not assume the and where agh comes.
 
Here's what I believe to be the correct rhythm and stresses of the ring verse, in Black Speech and English. You can see that the stresses or accents line up on beats 1, 2, and 3 in both languages, a perfect match. In fact, measures 1 and 3 are exact mappings. The mistake I think Corey made during the lecture was assuming measure two should line up between the two languages, just because they have the same number of syllables. Once you change the rhythm it works perfectly. So, both measures, 2 and 4, have an extra syllable in the Black Speech ("tul") not present in the English, but the English also has an extra syllable in measure 2, sort of a pickup. Your thoughts?

Ring Verse.jpg
 
Last edited:
I think 'Them' has one syllable, whereas ba tul is two. I don't think they have the same rhythm.
 
Flammifer said:
I think 'Them' has one syllable, whereas ba tul is two. I don't think they have the same rhythm.
Click to expand...
Agreed! In fact, this was exactly my point! :) I don't think Tolkien intended the second measure to have the same rhythm in English vs. Black Speech, even though they have the same number of syllables. I think that both the English and the Black Speech have an "extra" syllable in this line, if that makes sense. In English, the "extra" syllable is "to", acting as a pickup to the stressed "find" on beat three. And in the Black Speech, the "extra" syllable is the "-tul" of "grimbatul", which is missing in the English.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top